RE: [xmca] a minus times a plus

["Eugene Matusov" <ematusov@UDel.Edu>]

Dear Jay and Mike and everybody--

Conditionally, Jay, I like Mike's statement as well,

> > It
> > is the
> > heterogeneity within the "two parts" and leakage between them and
> > their
> > relations to "their context" that IS life.

but only conditionally. There are situations when this statement is deadly
but binary logic is on the side of life. I remember a famous allegoric
statement from Russian novel "Master and Margarita" by Michael Bulgakov. In
short, in the novel's plot, the Devil visited Stalinist Russia (Moscow to be
exact) in the 1930s during the Stalinist worst purges. Among other things
the Devil visited a theater to make familiar with New Soviet people. In
theater buffet, the Devil noticed rotten fish with the label, "Fish of the
third [degree] freshness." The Devil told the buffet salesperson, "Dear
salesperson, somebody has lied to you. There is no such thing as 'fish of
the third-degree freshness. Fish can be only one degree of freshness: either
it is fresh or not. Respectful, your fish is not fresh, it stinks." This
short exchange revealed the deception of Stalinist "leakage" of two parts
(namely, life and death). The binary logic presented by the Devil here was
on the side of life, while non-binary Stalinist discourse of making 'white'
black and 'black' white (that at that time often referred as 'dialectics')
was on the side of death.

I think we might be careful in indorsing any universal statements even when
they can be true, on average (in our sociocultural conditions). We should be
also careful with our fight against scientific positivism that has
historically emerged in response to (religious) totalitarian ideology of
manipulative "leakages". After the Bush administration reign, I have become
even more careful about dissing positivistic science.... (By the way, the
Bush administration used discourses that were convincingly based on both the
binary logic and at the same time on the manipulative "leakages", like, for
example, torture becomes not torture but rather a permissible grey area of
an "intense interrogation technique"). Binary logic can bring life
sometimes, indeed....

What do you think?

Eugene

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> On Behalf Of Jay Lemke
> Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 4:46 PM
> To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] a minus times a plus
> 
> Right on, Mike!!
> 
> Jay Lemke
> Professor
> Educational Studies
> University of Michigan
> Ann Arbor, MI 48109
> www.umich.edu/~jaylemke
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On May 2, 2009, at 8:37 PM, Mike Cole wrote:
> 
> > What one I think is literally deadening, Eugene, is binaries with
> > uniformities on both sides. Under such conditions, change is
> > impossible. It
> > is the
> > heterogeneity within the "two parts" and leakage between them and
> > their
> > relations to "their context" that IS life.
> > mike
> >
> > On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Tony Whitson <twhitson@udel.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> According to Wikipedia, "Jackie Mason" was born Yacov Moshe Maza
> >> (for what
> >> it's worth).
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 2 May 2009, Michael Glassman wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Eugene,
> >>>
> >>> I would argue that the intonation is not so much related to
> >>> language as it
> >>> is to culture - in essence a part of cultural capital that can be
> >>> found in
> >>> Russia, but in a number of other places around the world with a
> >>> number of
> >>> different languages.  You use the example,
> >>>
> >>> -?? (da-da) is a good translation from Mogenbesser's Jewish
> English,
> >>> "Yeah, yeah" in Russian. As you, probably, know, Russian is very
> >>> intonation-based language - almost any word might have the
> >>> opposite meaning
> >>> with the right intonation. Like for example, "Have you my taken my
> >>> book?" "I
> >>> need your book badly!" ("?? ?? ???? ??? ??????» --
> >>> «????? ??? ????? ????
> >>> ?????!») - it is difficult to translate this Russian exchange into
> >>> English
> >>> because the response has the intonation indicating the opposite
> >>> meaning that
> >>> its formal semantics suggests. One Russian (Soviet) poet commented
> >>> that
> >>> Russian language does not support «?????» (i.e., report to a
> >>> secret police).
> >>>
> >>> But anybody who has listened to Jackie Mason, not such a good
> >>> human being
> >>> but a pretty good comedian, has heard him using the type of
> >>> intonation you
> >>> are discussing brilliantly in English - so brilliantly you would
> >>> wonder how
> >>> it could work in any other language - but of course it could.  I'm
> >>> sure the
> >>> same intonation, or maybe different types of intonations
> >>> expressing meaning
> >>> but especially sense, could be used in almost any language as long
> >>> as the
> >>> speaker was comfortable with it.   What is interesting about the
> >>> use of this
> >>> type of intonation is when somebody uses it - at least in English
> >>> - I can
> >>> make a pretty good guess about where they grew up in the United
> >>> States.
> >>> Some people who are really good at this can even limit it to
> general
> >>> neighborhoods - and you immediately recognize certain cultural
> >>> qualities
> >>> about that individual and it cuts through a lot of other
> >>> information.  On
> >>> the other end of the spectrum somebody could use the intonation
> >>> perfectly in
> >>> Columbus Ohio and individuals would just understand the remark
> >>> based on the
> >>> more straight forward understanding (and might consider you a
> >>> little alien
> >>> for using the intonation).  What also might suggest the intonation
> >>> being
> >>> part of cultural capital rather than the language itself is the
> >>> fact the I
> >>> think it is often time used as a form of intimacy, kidding, or
> >>> making fun in
> >>> a non-maliscious way.
> >>>
> >>> Michael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>>
> >>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Eugene Matusov
> >>> Sent: Sat 5/2/2009 1:31 PM
> >>> To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>> Cc: backontrack@wwscholars.org; 'Zoi Philippakos'; 'eXtended Mind,
> >>> Culture, Activity'; 'PIG'
> >>> Subject: RE: [xmca] a minus times a plus
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dear Mike and everybody-
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> You wrote, "another example of binary logic which is anti-human".
> >>> I wonder
> >>> what makes this logic anti-human is not necessary that it is
> >>> binary, but
> >>> maybe the fact that it strives to be the universal, unconditional,
> >>> disembodied, and decontextualized. I think that limited and
> >>> situated binary
> >>> relations can be humane. As you nicely put it before, the
> >>> universal answer
> >>> to any problem is, "it depends" ;-) The big problem, of course,
> >>> what it
> >>> depends on... (I always say to my grad students that the answer
> >>> for the
> >>> latter question will be addressed in a future Advanced Grad
> >>> Sociocultural
> >>> Seminar that I never teach J)
> >>>
> >>> ??
> >>>
> >>> -?? (da-da) is a good translation from Mogenbesser's Jewish
> English,
> >>> "Yeah, yeah" in Russian. As you, probably, know, Russian is very
> >>> intonation-based language - almost any word might have the
> >>> opposite meaning
> >>> with the right intonation. Like for example, "Have you my taken my
> >>> book?" "I
> >>> need your book badly!" ("?? ?? ???? ??? ??????» --
> >>> «????? ??? ????? ????
> >>> ?????!») - it is difficult to translate this Russian exchange into
> >>> English
> >>> because the response has the intonation indicating the opposite
> >>> meaning that
> >>> its formal semantics suggests. One Russian (Soviet) poet commented
> >>> that
> >>> Russian language does not support «?????» (i.e., report to a
> >>> secret police).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ed made an interesting and thought-provoking point, "Social
> >>> relations
> >>> don't give rise to mathematics, but mathematics seems to give,
> >>> perspectivally, a rise to social relations." I think that in
> >>> general, it is
> >>> a chicken-egg problem but I suspect that social relations have
> >>> priority over
> >>> math. So, Ed, we have a respectful disagreement, indeed. The
> >>> reason for my
> >>> suspicion is that usually, although not always, social relations
> >>> have a
> >>> priority over everything else. For example, it seems that
> historical
> >>> emergency of geometry was a result of a certain development of
> >>> private
> >>> property on land and conflicts associated with it. Certain (but
> >>> not all!)
> >>> mathematical questions could emerge only within certain social
> >>> relations..
> >>> One of these vivid examples can be mathematical division. I'm
> >>> always amazed
> >>> how difficult for Western kids to understand fractional division
> >>> leading to
> >>> a number bigger that divided. For example, 2 divided by ½ becomes
> >>> 4. Western
> >>> understanding of fair sharing almost exclusively as splitting the
> >>> whole on
> >>> equal but smaller parts (private property) makes very difficult to
> >>> consider
> >>> a possibility for collective sharing in which the more people
> >>> share the more
> >>> value the whole has. We have a PIG Lab of Internationally Recognize
> >>> Excellence - the more people use it, the more valuable it becomes
> >>> (to a
> >>> point of course, ;-). By collective sharing, ten PIGgies virtually
> >>> have 10
> >>> labs! Or 1 divided on 1/10 is 10. I think this fractional division
> >>> reflects
> >>> collective sharing (and collective fairness) in contrast to whole
> >>> number
> >>> division based on private property sharing (and private property
> >>> fairness).
> >>> It is interesting to study this question empirically....
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What do you think?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Eugene
> >>>
> >>> PS I know that everyone in this XMCA discussion who replies to my
> >>> messages
> >>> gets bounced message from the PIG email list (no connection to the
> >>> swine
> >>> flu!). I try to resend your messages to the my PIGgy colleagues.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------
> >>>
> >>> Eugene Matusov, Ph.D.
> >>>
> >>> Professor of Education
> >>>
> >>> School of Education
> >>>
> >>> University of Delaware
> >>>
> >>> Newark, DE 19716, USA
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> email: ematusov@udel.edu
> >>>
> >>> fax: 1-(302)-831-4110
> >>>
> >>> website: http://ematusov.soe.udel.edu <http://
> >>> ematusov.soe.udel.edu/>  <
> >>> http://ematusov.soe.udel.edu/>
> >>>
> >>> publications: http://ematusov.soe.udel.edu/vita/publications.htm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dialogic Pedagogy Forum: http://diaped.soe.udel.edu <
> >>> http://diaped.soe.udel.edu/>  <http://diaped.soe.udel.edu/>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> From: Mike Cole [mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com]
> >>> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 10:01 PM
> >>> To: Eugene Matusov
> >>> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; backontrack@wwscholars.org;
> >>> Zoi
> >>> Philippakos; PIG
> >>> Subject: Re: [xmca] a minus times a plus
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That it works to think that the enemy of your enemy is your friend
> >>> is
> >>> another example
> >>> of binary logic which is anti-human. Shit happens a lot, Eugene.
> >>>
> >>> Your yeah yeah example is in the increasingly long and equally
> >>> interesting
> >>> trail of emails on
> >>> this thread.
> >>>
> >>> da da
> >>> ?
> >>> zhanchit?
> >>> mike
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Eugene Matusov <ematusov@udel.edu>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear Mike--
> >>>
> >>> You wrote,
> >>>
> >>>> And for sure, Eugene, it is a cardinal error to believe that the
> >>>> enemy
> >>>> of
> >>>> your enemy is your friend. Maybe, maybe
> >>>> not. Like all laws of social science, it all depends.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Actually, it worked rather well during the WWII for the Allies (US-
> >>> UK) and
> >>> the USSR. Their cooperation in opposition to the Nazi Germany was
> >>> governed
> >>> by the Arabic wisdom "an enemy of your enemy is your friend." It
> >>> can be
> >>> powerful indeed but as you said it is not universal.
> >>>
> >>> As to the natural language and the formal logic (math), in natural
> >>> language
> >>> (+1)*(+1)=-1, according to famous anecdote, "The most celebrated
> >>> [Sidney]
> >>> Morgenbesser anecdote involved visiting Oxford philosopher J. L.
> >>> Austin,
> >>> who
> >>> noted that it was peculiar that although there are many languages
> >>> in which
> >>> a
> >>> double negative makes a positive, no example existed where two
> >>> positives
> >>> expressed a negative. In a dismissive voice, Morgenbesser replied
> >>> from the
> >>> audience, 'Yeah, yeah.'"
> >>>
> >>> Take care,
> >>>
> >>> Eugene
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-
> bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>> ]
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> On Behalf Of Mike Cole
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 8:38 PM
> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Cc: backontrack@wwscholars.org; Zoi Philippakos; PIG
> >>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] a minus times a plus
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Eugene, the mixture of plus and minus was the focus of my inquiry.
> >>>> Natural
> >>>> language understanding
> >>>> of double negatives solves that problem for 2 numbers, beyond
> >>>> which I
> >>>> assume
> >>>> natural language needs
> >>>> a notation system to keep track.
> >>>>
> >>>> So far Jerry Balzano's mirror explanation seems like it has the
> >>>> best
> >>>> chance
> >>>> with my grand daughter (in
> >>>> part because i can actually imagine creating the demonstration
> that
> >>>> lines up
> >>>> intuition and notation). I
> >>>> have not had time to read all of the notes in this thread owing to
> >>>> heavy
> >>>> teaching and extra lecture schedule
> >>>> and a rash of recommendation letters out of season (which I will
> >>>> accept
> >>>> as a
> >>>> sub for swine flu). But
> >>>> simply in scanning could I make a plea for socio-CULTURAL
> >>>> constructivism? If
> >>>> we do not keep what is
> >>>> essential to human forms of human sociality in the discussion, we
> >>>> might
> >>>> as
> >>>> well be talking about bonobos
> >>>> who, at least, know enough to make love not war.
> >>>>
> >>>> And for sure, Eugene, it is a cardinal error to believe that the
> >>>> enemy
> >>>> of
> >>>> your enemy is your friend. Maybe, maybe
> >>>> not. Like all laws of social science, it all depends.
> >>>>
> >>>> mike
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Eugene Matusov
> <ematusov@udel.edu>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear everybody--
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In response to Mike's profound inquiry of why a minus times a
> >>>>> minus
> >>>>>
> >>>> is a
> >>>>
> >>>>> plus, I was thinking that it is a mathematical model of the
> Arabic
> >>>>>
> >>>> wisdom
> >>>>
> >>>>> that "an enemy of my enemy is my friend." Of course, the latter
> is
> >>>>>
> >>>> not
> >>>>
> >>>>> always true -- we have plenty of examples when enemy of our
> >>>>> enemy is
> >>>>>
> >>>> still
> >>>>
> >>>>> our enemy (or just indifferent) and, thus, for these types of
> >>>>> social
> >>>>> relations, the mathematical model of (-1) x (-1) =1 does not
> work.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Just
> >>>>
> >>>>> consider, for an example, the relations among the US, Al-Qaida,
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>
> >>>> Saddam
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hussein.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The issue for me is why the Western civilization prioritizes (and
> >>>>>
> >>>> then
> >>>>
> >>>>> mathematizes) social relations described in the Arabic wisdom.
> One
> >>>>>
> >>>> answer
> >>>>
> >>>>> is
> >>>>> because "the real world" works according to these social
> relations
> >>>>>
> >>>> (i.e.,
> >>>>
> >>>>> the social relations is just an example of the truth out there).
> >>>>> An
> >>>>> alternative explanation is that the Western civilization can
> >>>>> afford
> >>>>>
> >>>> and
> >>>>
> >>>>> might be even benefit from imposing these social relations on
> "the
> >>>>>
> >>>> real
> >>>>
> >>>>> world" that by itself is indifferent to any social relations (and
> >>>>>
> >>>> thus
> >>>>
> >>>>> mathematical models). Any other explanations?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What do you think?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Eugene
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Behalf Of Ng Foo Keong
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 12:23 PM
> >>>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] a minus times a plus
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> Is Mathematics _merely_ socially constructed, or is there something
> >>>>>> deeper and inevitable?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think this deserves a new thread, but I couldn't manage to
> >>>>>> start
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> one.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Let me try to draw out and assemble the line of discussion that
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> spun
> >>>>
> >>>>> off from the "a minus times a plus" thread.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In her inaugural post to xcma, Anna Sfard about talked "rules
> >>>>>> of the mathematical game" among other things.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Then Jay Lemke said:-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>> I think it's important, however, to see, as Anna emphasizes,
> >>>>>>> that there is a certain "arbitrariness" involved in this, or
> >>>>>>> if you like it better: a freedom of choice. Yes, it's
> >>>>>>> structure-and-agency all over again! Structure determines that
> >>>>>>> some things fit into bigger pictures and some don't, but
> >>>>>>> agency is always at work deciding which pictures, which kind
> >>>>>>> of fit, which structures, etc. And behind that values, and
> >>>>>>> culture, and how we feel about things.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----
> >>>>>> Then I (Ng Foo Keong) said:-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> regarding structure and agency, arbitrariness:-
> >>>>>>> i think now it's time for me to pop this question that has been
> >>>>>>> bugging me for some time.  i am convinced that mathematics is
> >>>>>>> socially constructured, but i am not so convinced that
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> mathematics
> >>>>
> >>>>> is _merely_ socially constructured.  if we vary across cultures
> >>>>>>> and different human activities, we might find different ways
> >>>>>>> in which patterns and structure can be expressed and yet we
> >>>>>>> might
> >>>>>>> find commonalities / analogies.  the question i am asking is:
> >>>>>>> is maths just a ball game determined by some group of nerds who
> >>>>>>> happen to be in power and dominate the discourse, or is there
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> some
> >>>>
> >>>>> invariant, something deeper in maths that can transcend and unite
> >>>>>>> language, culture, activity .... ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Foo Keong,
> >>>>>> NIE, Singapore
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----
> >>>>>> Then Ed Wall said:-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ng Foo Keong
> >>>>>>> As regards your question about mathematics being socially
> >>>>>>> constructed, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by
> >>>>>>> mathematics or what kind of evidence would convince you it
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> wasn't.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Suppose I said that there was evidence for innate subtizing.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> >>>>>> signature database 4043 (20090429) __________
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> virus
> >>>>> signature
> >>>>> database 4043 (20090429) __________
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> >>>> signature database 4043 (20090429) __________
> >>>>
> >>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> >>>> signature database 4049 (20090501) __________
> >>>>
> >>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> >>> signature
> >>> database 4049 (20090501) __________
> >>>
> >>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> >>> signature database 4049 (20090501) __________
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> xmca mailing list
> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Tony Whitson
> >> UD School of Education
> >> NEWARK  DE  19716
> >>
> >> twhitson@udel.edu
> >> _______________________________
> >>
> >> "those who fail to reread
> >> are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
> >>                 -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> 
> 
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4049 (20090501) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> 
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4049 (20090501) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca